What else can be more disturbing than a phone call or an email from the boss over the weekend? How many times do we hesitate to answer the cellphone Saturday afternoon when the boss’s name pops up on the caller ID? A recent research has put a phone call from the office over the weekend on par with a bungee jump in terms of the level of stress. Work-related emails and text messages after work hours are also known to be major health hazards for employees.

The new electronic gadgets have made everyone accessible and reachable 24 hours a day and 7 days a week, no matter where we go ― when an airplane touches down in a foreign country, the roaming function starts automatically. But the new electronic devices have also chained us to the desks and offices, and put us within a holler’s distance from our bosses, wherever we are.

So, to liberate employees from the 24/7 stand-by mode, serious efforts are now being made in some countries to ban employers and managers from sending emails or making phone calls to their employees during the weekend or after work hours. France and Germany are two such countries taking specific measures in various forms to regulate out-of-hours contact, except for some emergency situations. Some firms in Europe even stop their companies’ servers from processing emails directed to certain workers during a designated window of time. These now must wait until office hours.

As a way to restore the work-life balance, no one can oppose the basic idea behind this new regulation. The around-the-clock work mode using these portable (and now wearable) gadgets is indeed increasing the toll on workers’ mental well-being and familial relationships.

Out-of-hours communication has also been a touchy issue in the Korean workplace. While managers expect full commitment from their staff as they have been trained, young generation employees simply do not buy the idea. Weekend calling has been constantly listed in surveys of the young generation as one of the most complained-about workplace behavior. Sooner or later, we might also see similar prohibitions in union agreements or even a government regulation.

The no-contact regulation may work in some workplaces, and protect the health of the workers. But in many others, this is one such area where etiquette rather than laws and regulations could be more efficient.

Consider, for instance, the emergency exception. How does an employee know for sure if a particular call is an emergency if he or she has the right to turn off the phone or not to answer it? All these exceptions themselves presuppose the existence of communication.

Likewise, prohibiting “work related” contact also raises the difficult question of what it means. Taken literally, it would prohibit virtually all communication from a manager, including even an email of encouragement and a message of praise for jobs well done. So, all “good” communication will be shut down along with “harmful” ones.

And perhaps the interesting thing is whether such imposed silence would mean a harsher work environment during work hours and work days. Bosses would have to be more efficient and demanding during the work hours and work days knowing that they are on their own after 6 p.m. and during the weekends. Or, a peaceful weekend of silence would only mean an “explosive” Monday or at least a Monday morning with cold stares and frowns.

So, perhaps things are better as they are. What we really need is good bosses who know how to threat staff with etiquette and courtesy, rather than another set of laws and regulation. Companies should teach proper communication skills in the digital age as part of interpersonal skills. Enforcing what is essentially a etiquette with law, sometimes does more harm than good. 

By Lee Jae-min

Lee Jae-min is an associate professor of law at Seoul National University. ― Ed.